Tachyons: paper spells out how to find them

phys.org...

the paper discusses ways to determine if tachyons exist. if they do exist it points to exotic mass and energy.

According to Ehrlich, the magnitude of the neutrino's imaginary mass is 0.33 electronvolts, or 2/3 of a millionth that of an electron. He deduces this value by showing that six different observations from cosmic rays, cosmology, and particle physics all yield this same value within their margin of error. One observation, for example, involves the tiny variations in cosmic background radiation left over from the big bang, while another involves the shape of the cosmic ray spectrum.

So Tachyons, the supposed faster than light particles in in the news again.

My theory is this:

In our convoluted universe, we are on the cusp of gaining quantum knowledge, and it seems, "if you can think it, it can happen"

Therefore, I believe Tachyons do exist, and will be found.

Peace

it saddens me that these particular tachyons aren't useful for FTL travel. but maybe they could be used for communications.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

"Imaginary mass" of 0.333 • e?

Hm, that's a first. Calling a real value "imaginary".

I don't know, but this does not make much sense when you think about it. Particles that speed up when they lose energy? And citing neutrinos as candidates?

It's like saying, "I build my car with normal matter. I know it weights 3 tons but I call this weight 'imaginary'; and furthermore, the less power its motor has, the faster it'll run. "

Makes no sense at all.

S&F for sharing nevertheless - my critic is not directed against you, it is directed to the claim of this man.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

I read a digest of this paper and couldn't puzzle out where he got some of his numbers. I may have to pass this along to a professional physicist to see if it makes any sense.

well it's possible he's a fringe researcher but it is also possible he is not. imaginary mass and negative mass and matter are part of the mathematics of relativity and the standard model. he's just saying they are not mathematical artifacts but may be real. He's not the first.

when you arbitrarily assign a velocity to particles that exceeds c in GR math it avoids the infinities at C and creates a situation where the regular rules aren't done away with but everything works the opposite way it does below c.

negative mass (believe it or not) is assigned to all matter in QED before re-normalization. this means physics actually assumes negative mass; though again this is considered to just be a artifact of the math instead of reality.

Some believe the negative mass is real and a way to separate the terms of the equation before re-normalization so that the negative mass is exposed in normal matter may be possible. one such man is Dr Woodward of mach effect thruster and wormhole fame.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

Yes, but we are here talking about imaginary mass, not negative mass. Mass that is equal to i, not any real number.

And going on and saying that neutrinos are carrying imaginary mass? We know of their interaction with weak force; this is the fundamental behind neutrino detectors. If they truly have imaginary mass, then the effect would have been seen in interactions with heavy water atoms in neutrino detectors!

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Yes, but we are here talking about imaginary mass, not negative mass. Mass that is equal to i, not a real number.

And going on and saying that neutrinos are carrying imaginary mass? We know of their interaction with nucleons; this is the fundamental behind neutrino detectors. If they truly have imaginary mass, then the effect would have been seen in such interactions!

yup but two things: first remember what the concept of i does for us in math. (it allows us to work with negative numbers among other things. it is the square root of negative 1. it is most often used as a cooefficient or modifier to regular numbers. And secondly: remember there is some weird stuff people don't speak about often like hidden domains or sectors of the universe. mathematical surely... or maybe not:

phys.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

there are other hidden sectors of imaginary space in the math of physics that may not be as imaginary as we generally believe.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

Well, you could be right. It would be delusional to believe that we know everything of the universe, everywhere, everytime.

I for one would welcome the proof of the existence of tachyons - they would give support to one of my theories.

well the article does mention that evidence for tachyons may be in the data for some unrelated experiments. that in that case all it would take is analysis of existing data to see if the signal exists. no new facilities. just number crunching.

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: stormbringer1701

"Imaginary mass" of 0.333 • e?

Hm, that's a first. Calling a real value "imaginary".

They implied the "i" by saying the magnitude of the imaginary mass was that.

originally posted by: swanne
...I know it weights 3 tons but I call this weight 'imaginary'...

Ah. You don't understand vectors or complex numbers then. "imaginary" vector components are used every day in engineering and physics.

linky

What the guy's saying is that the neutrino's mass is complex, and is about .66 real and about .33 imaginary. In this context, "imaginary" doesn't mean "made up", it means that fraction of the mass is multiplied by the square root of -1.

Instead of the mass of such a particle varying as you'd expect with relativistic velocity, its mass would increase anomalously, and that would be a giveaway that something called "imaginary mass" actually existed.

a reply to: Bedlam

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Bedlam

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I read Erhlich has such proof but I cannot verify his proofs since they are only briefly mentioned in the article.

Only time will tell. I do hope he can prove the existence of tachyons but I try and stay impartial about this.

By the way I myself wrote about imaginary values in physics, right here on ATS - almost exactly one year ago, I discovered that negative mass would give imaginary time, my findings are accessible here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

So I do have a fair grasp on imaginary values - I simply did not realize complex numbers is what Erhlich meant, thanks for pointing it out, a star for you.

Still, strange coincidence that this article pops up almost exactly one year after my finding about imaginary time...

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: Bedlam

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I read Erhlich has such proof but I cannot verify his proofs since they are only briefly mentioned in the article.

I don't know if I believe it, either, but it would be interesting to find out.

a reply to: Watchfull

I BELEIVE I KNOW NEXT WEEKS WINNINNG LOTTERY NUMBERS,
Never happens though.
Perhaps things may change if I actually purchase a ticket?

a reply to: [post=18808323]ecossiepossie[/post
I thought tachyons were what my ex used to describe my dress sense.

She was always saying don't wear this or that
As it looks tacky on you.

a reply to: swanne

If tachyons do travel faster than light.
We could never quantify them as they would arrive before they departed

originally posted by: ecossiepossie
a reply to: swanne

If tachyons do travel faster than light.
We could never quantify them as they would arrive before they departed

time reversed effects can be accounted for experimentally. for example; the entanglement experiments have shown entanglement can work when one of a chain of entangled particles no longer exists. in other words present particles can be entangled with a particle from the past.

with a time reversed experiment for particle collisions of course you could look for anomalous effects in the detectors that occurred a mathematically predicted interval before the planned collision event.

you'd have both a time signature and a mass and energy signature.

another way to verify tachyonic effects would be to determine if the mach effect is real. Even Einstein respected Ernst Mach and had no answer to Mach's own single particle gedanken WRT relativity.